Question five: Where do we go from here? Its up to you!

[Pythoninfinite]

This is such a many faceted issue - stupid regulations state-by-state that are actually now contributing to the loss of species, a huge variation in the needs of keepers across the country (Qld keepers basically have no real problems... WA keepers have enormous problems), the credibility difficulties we bring upon ourselves by supporting smuggled morphs/exotics, not to mention the resistance State bureaucracies will have to any suggestion that control be centralised, possibly in Canberra. It would be very difficult for us to demonstrate any POLITICAL advantage in centralisation, regardless of the ease it would give a lobby group in liaising with decision-makers. At the moment, each state/territory thinks they have the best system, and they are united only in their desire to catch miscreants (not a bad thing in itself) - as far as policy goes, the prospect of any of the states handing power to anyone else is just about nil.

I'm certainly not saying that a national group isn't needed, or that it can't achieve success as we move forward, but I see from many of the responses here that as a group we have identified a number of problems from the outset, a major one being the diversity of state regs across the country. To suggest at this stage, when we haven't even undertaken the huge task of surveying the needs of keepers across the country, that centralising and unifying the state wildlife management policies will assist us in achieving our goals, is putting the cart way before the horse. Any such move by the states would be decades away, if it ever happens.

Any lobby group will have to work long and hard to firstly identify the real problems we face in each jurisdiction, and then develop a priority list and strategy for dealing with each one. For me, it would begin with attempting to raise our credibility with these bureaucracies (and bear in mind that it's not only the keepers who lack cred, the departments themselves often lack any shred of credibility when it comes to conservation - WA & the Cane Toad invasion for example). It's people like Gavin who contribute enormously to increasing our credibility as a useful resource for conservation (or at least species preservation) and increased knowledge. I'm sure that in the NT, Gavin's efforts will be met with the interest, appreciation and acknowledgement they deserve... but I've been totally bemused in the last 10 years that John Weigel's efforts with the RSP - a massively important demonstration of what can be done when enthusiasm, determination and skills are combined - have largely been ignored by the CALM/DEC/whatever they call themselves now. In any of the discussions we had over the years up until 2003 when WA came out of the steam era, the RSP story was NEVER mentioned, even though the successes were being acknowledged in other states.

I've had lots of discussions with Greg M about the huge potential the private sector has if it is allowed to become involved (and more importantly participate) in the conservation debate (my particular area of interest) - we have within our ranks the important resources of time, space, some of us have money (not me lol!), a keeness to see beneficial change among other attributes. Not everybody will share my priorities of course, but I think that if we can start the ball rolling by challenging the bureaucratic notion that we are all a bunch of money-hungry exploiters and black-marketeers, and are keen to use our resources to gain a better understanding of our fauna, then hopefully there will be an overarching benefit to reptile keepers as a whole. To me, the question of credibility is the single most important issue we face. There are, within our ranks, individuals who will tear our credibility to shreds for quick personal gain in an instant if we don't develop the means to sideline them, or at least isolate those with demonstrably good intentions from any influence they might have.

Sorry for the massive essay again , but I did start by saying this is a multi-faceted task. Not an impossible one by any means, but one which will require sound strategies at the outset for dealing with internal matters as well as external. It won't matter how you approach a Government department with your well-intentioned plan on Tuesday if the've busted a significant reptile smuggler the day before. Currently most of us are tarred with the same brush.

Jamie

 

[Snowman]

CALM/DEC/whatever they call themselves now.

If they added to the keepers list as often as they changed names we would have quite a list by now! They are now know as Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW)

 

[Striker]

When making a quick reply: in the tool bar click "switch editor to source mode" (its the far left button)
then
you
create
a
new line

Thanks for that.

Easy...


Getting back to the topic of this thread, now that these questions have been asked and many have provided comments and opinions I will be interested to keep track of what happens next. Gavin (and anyone else involved) where possible please keep us informed of your intentions, the next actions and of course, whether or not there is anything that your average reptile fan can do to help.

 

[ronhalling]

This is such a many faceted issue - stupid regulations state-by-state that are actually now contributing to the loss of species, a huge variation in the needs of keepers across the country (Qld keepers basically have no real problems... WA keepers have enormous problems), the credibility difficulties we bring upon ourselves by supporting smuggled morphs/exotics, not to mention the resistance State bureaucracies will have to any suggestion that control be centralised, possibly in Canberra. It would be very difficult for us to demonstrate any POLITICAL advantage in centralisation, regardless of the ease it would give a lobby group in liaising with decision-makers. At the moment, each state/territory thinks they have the best system, and they are united only in their desire to catch miscreants (not a bad thing in itself) - as far as policy goes, the prospect of any of the states handing power to anyone else is just about nil.

I'm certainly not saying that a national group isn't needed, or that it can't achieve success as we move forward, but I see from many of the responses here that as a group we have identified a number of problems from the outset, a major one being the diversity of state regs across the country. To suggest at this stage, when we haven't even undertaken the huge task of surveying the needs of keepers across the country, that centralising and unifying the state wildlife management policies will assist us in achieving our goals, is putting the cart way before the horse. Any such move by the states would be decades away, if it ever happens.

Any lobby group will have to work long and hard to firstly identify the real problems we face in each jurisdiction, and then develop a priority list and strategy for dealing with each one. For me, it would begin with attempting to raise our credibility with these bureaucracies (and bear in mind that it's not only the keepers who lack cred, the departments themselves often lack any shred of credibility when it comes to conservation - WA & the Cane Toad invasion for example). It's people like Gavin who contribute enormously to increasing our credibility as a useful resource for conservation (or at least species preservation) and increased knowledge. I'm sure that in the NT, Gavin's efforts will be met with the interest, appreciation and acknowledgement they deserve... but I've been totally bemused in the last 10 years that John Weigel's efforts with the RSP - a massively important demonstration of what can be done when enthusiasm, determination and skills are combined - have largely been ignored by the CALM/DEC/whatever they call themselves now. In any of the discussions we had over the years up until 2003 when WA came out of the steam era, the RSP story was NEVER mentioned, even though the successes were being acknowledged in other states.

I've had lots of discussions with Greg M about the huge potential the private sector has if it is allowed to become involved (and more importantly participate) in the conservation debate (my particular area of interest) - we have within our ranks the important resources of time, space, some of us have money (not me lol!), a keeness to see beneficial change among other attributes. Not everybody will share my priorities of course, but I think that if we can start the ball rolling by challenging the bureaucratic notion that we are all a bunch of money-hungry exploiters and black-marketeers, and are keen to use our resources to gain a better understanding of our fauna, then hopefully there will be an overarching benefit to reptile keepers as a whole. To me, the question of credibility is the single most important issue we face. There are, within our ranks, individuals who will tear our credibility to shreds for quick personal gain in an instant if we don't develop the means to sideline them, or at least isolate those with demonstrably good intentions from any influence they might have.

Sorry for the massive essay again , but I did start by saying this is a multi-faceted task. Not an impossible one by any means, but one which will require sound strategies at the outset for dealing with internal matters as well as external. It won't matter how you approach a Government department with your well-intentioned plan on Tuesday if the've busted a significant reptile smuggler the day before. Currently most of us are tarred with the same brush.

Jamie

Thanks Jamie, you have said everything i had on my mind on this subject, i have been trying to work out how to put it in print without sounding like a know-it-all, I know from personal experience how many brick walls a person/group comes up against when trying to set up something like this Association Gavin is talking about, as back in the early 80's i helped get into being the L.D.R.T.A (Long Distance Road Transport Association) and the T.W.A.F.A (Truckies Wives And Families Association) with Ted "Mad Dog" Stevens, It is not the Federal departments that are the real problem it is the States and Territories and their refusals to talk to each other on points of common interest least one gets more kudos than the other, In the end we had to align ourselves with the T.W.U before we could be viewed with any credibility.

In my humble opinion we should wait till all this electioneering has finished and all the votes are counted before any talks begin with anyone, then an expression of interest should be sent to the Local and State "Greens" Members outlining what it is we want and what outcome we are looking at seeing, adding as much checkable information as can humanly be added (more is better in this case) and then continuously lobbying these Members until a face to face meeting can be organised between them and duly elected members of our Association, Creating an Association is the easy bit, it is the lobbying and harassing of the State and Territory members of Parliament that is the time and money killer.

We all have to realise also that in it's infancy an Association eats a lot of funds and a lot of people are not going to understand this, so a Mission Statement outlining where the money will be spent and why has to be drafted and given to every member who donates money no matter how much or little it is so that no inferences to impropriety can be made as this is another credibility killer when it comes to dealing with government departments. there are hundreds of other pitfalls that could be mentioned here but that would again be putting the cart before the horse, lets all get behind Gavin and if he wants to try and get this thing up and running we need to give him all the support we can because as i previously mentioned in this ramble i have been there in the beginning of projects like this and know what road blocks he is going to hit. ...................................Ron

 

[glebo]

G'day Everyone.
I agree with so many of your sentiments and it is with people like many of you who have experience with the grass roots beginnings of organisations that we will need to guide the 'next steps’! Any group will need to take on board so many of your good ideas and thinking but this will not be a quick process. We should get it correct and align all ducks and disseminate as much information to everyone who is into reptiles about the ideas and how they benefit everyone and get significant feedback before we do anything in a big way. However to do nothing is also just as paralyzing, so it is important that those who do have time and can help in this process, do so. We can put together a volunteer interest group to help get this process in action, and this might be achieved relatively easily if we have names of people prepared to help (I know we have many already from the forum and phone calls which is great). It will not help that we all live in different states but this age of the social media has some advantages I’m sure. By that I am hoping that someone can supply or suggest an email account (or we all have facebook (ill need help there for sure)) that we use as a point of reference for this group, and have different volunteers working on things like code of practice (maybe the recommendations put to Parks NSW by the 12 men with 300 years keeping experience between them would be a good document to start with?), registration, mission statement, research, fund raising, web site, legal standing, newsletter, administration, applications, working with parks authorities, natural groups within our ranks like conservation, morphs and breeding. This is to name but a few of the million things that need to take place. I have spoken at length to a few of you and am heartened by the overwhelming response of support.

I heard this morning that there are 5 million people who are recreational fishers in Australia, and while I have no doubt we are not that big, from the different media and resources we have there are probably a few hundred thousand people who are very interested in reptiles in Australia, and of course their families, not to mention the reach of the pet industry itself. I am therefore convinced that we do have the numbers to not only make this happen, but to also effect change where it is needed. Please remember we do not want to set this up as a vehicle for me or any individual, it is not to bash people or create bad blood, but to ensure we are recognized as a legitimate interest group, that is as diverse as any in Australia and where necessary have our say listened to at any level, be it legal, political or social. I am confident with the correct structure most people will benefit from its workings, and be proud to say they belong to an Australia wide reptile interest group. While I am guided in all matters regarding this group I would probably not choose the acronym that is had by “Federal Australian Reptile Keepers Association”, but hey it is a democracy.
Thank-you to all who participated in these questions. I felt it was important that as many people as possible saw and participated in the questions, so that you could see how we each think and whether you all thought we are mature enough as a hobby and interest group to undertake the “NEXT STEP”. I will try say a bit more when I have a chance on this forum and also to put something in Scales and Tails Magazine if they allow it that is a bit more tangible than a herp forum about the Australia wide association, but hope you all think about how we can get this up and running as your help will be needed.
Kind regards
Gavin Bedford

 

[Pythoninfinite]

If I can be of benefit somehow Gavin, count me in! Great post Ron - nailed a few things there!

Jamie

 

[andynic07]

I think one thing that may stop people getting involved will be taxes. I think that there is a lot of people for varying reasons that are not declaring income from snake sales and these people may not want to be involved because if you you push the government too hard they may start chasing their 30 cents.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

I think one thing that may stop people getting involved will be taxes. I think that there is a lot of people for varying reasons that are not declaring income from snake sales and these people may not want to be involved because if you you push the government too hard they may start chasing their 30 cents.

I'd be very surprised if more than a handful of breeders would exceed profits beyond what could be called "hobby income" in this country. By the time you take out costs such as food, heating, time and all the other incidentals, for most the margin would probably be on the debit side of the ledger.

Jamie

 

[andynic07]

I'd be very surprised if more than a handful of breeders would exceed profits beyond what could be called "hobby income" in this country. By the time you take out costs such as food, heating, time and all the other incidentals, for most the margin would probably be on the debit side of the ledger.

Jamie

I do not doubt this fact and that is why a lot of people probably don't declare the income but I am sure that these same people would be annoyed if made to jump through these hoops because the government was pushed into something like this. This is only my thoughts that i have and it would be good if some of the small and medium sized "hobby" breeders would comment to gauge their actual thoughts.

 

[Bluetongue1]

While the notion has great merit, there are limitations to the parallels with amatuer fishing, as their situation differs markedly from ours. While hopefully achievable, it would certainly be a lot harder to implement and sustain for our hobby.
I would point out that the nominal $10 mentioned will buy you a single drink at a pub - not a lot of a sacrifice to make if brings real benefits to the hobby.


WA Python Embargo: The importation of pythons into WA is prohibited solely to exclude IBD and therefore eliminate the risk of this disease infecting wild populations. While the department here are aware that it is not overly common they do recognise that the time between infection and onset of symptoms has proven vary variable and is curently known to be up to 12 months. There is no posiive test available for live snakes and the quarantine period is not definitive other than at least 12 months. Even if the required quarantine was definite, the department do have the resources to supervise quarantine of animals for 12 months or longer. I cannot see someone being prepared to fork out a year's plus wages to plus provide the facility, to bring in pythons to WA.

 

[Wild~Touch]

The Greatest of All Mistakes is to do Nothing because you think you can only do a little...........~Zig Ziglar~

 

[Pythoninfinite]

With regard to the potential for virus import into WA... the diseases are already there, and whatever they're called now (CALM, DEC...) allows the import of elapids from interstate. Elapids certainly carry some of these viruses (in fact IBD is rather rare I think) - look at the losses at the ARP when they had their outbreak. I think the virus import thing is just an excuse to be restrictive, and especially with the potential for cross-breeding WA endemic pythons with some of the eastern forms. I've never believed the virus matter was more than an excuse.

Jamie

 

[wokka]

With regard to the potential for virus import into WA... the diseases are already there, and whatever they're called now (CALM, DEC...) allows the import of elapids from interstate. Elapids certainly carry some of these viruses (in fact IBD is rather rare I think) - look at the losses at the ARP when they had their outbreak. I think the virus import thing is just an excuse to be restrictive, and especially with the potential for cross-breeding WA endemic pythons with some of the eastern forms. I've never believed the virus matter was more than an excuse.

Jamie

Wouldn't it be better to allow legal importation rather than driving any imports under the table. Do the authorities live in fairy land and think that because it cant happen legally if doesnt happen? If there is a genuine consern about disease epidemics it is important to have a co-opertaive hobby rather than driving it underground! A line on a map doesn't stop disease.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

Wouldn't it be better to allow legal importation rather than driving any imports under the table. Do the authorities live in fairy land and think that because it cant happen legally if doesnt happen? If there is a genuine consern about disease epidemics it is important to have a co-opertaive hobby rather than driving it underground! A line on a map doesn't stop disease.

Of course it would Wokka, but we're talking WA here . Jackboot legislation is the chosen option over there, logic and cooperation don't enter into it. There is a barrier mentality that exists for nearly all animal & plant species - you'll even have your car thoroughly searched at the border before you're allowed to proceed into WA. Some it is reasonable - they don't have Starlings, Mynahs or Sparrows on the west coast (an eradication process for Starlings near Esperance is in place), and a few of the agricultural pests such as Codlin Moth. The Nullarbor is a natural barrier for some of these things.

An anecdote... I imported a Blue & Gold Macaw into WA about 2004. It had to be photographed at the airport by Ag Dept inspectors, the photo emailed to CALM headquarters for formal ID (in case it was an African Grey in disguise I guess - prohibited species in WA), and then formal approval for release of the bird was emailed to the inspectors... And if it arrived out of working hours, there would be a ~ $400 inspection fee to pay. I believe this is still the case for all non-domestic livestock, including reptiles.

J

 

[Bluetongue1]

IBD is a disease of boids (although Busho notes that it has been known to occur in (Colubridae and Viperidae). I don't know why they only chose IBD and not OPMV (now know to be Sunshine Virus here) as well. As frustrating as it might be for keepers, I personally feel there is due justification.


The argument about allowing legal imports is fallacious. What you are effectively saying is quarantine at borders does not work so why have it? It does work. While it may not be perfect, it is a numbers game and in this case all about reducing exposure to diseased animals. There are illegal collections here now but the owners are aware that people are likely to dob them into the department and so most are kept under wraps. At the same time, for similar reasons, trading of illegal animals is usually clandestine, although you do get the ocassional blatant idiot.


The department has been so obstructive and difficult to work with in developing the keeping system here, you cannot help but feel jaded at the end of the day and cynical of the motives of anything they do. This I understand only too well.

 

[cement]

To Gavin and Jamie,
what exactly are the issues that need addressing to warrant a federal / national group of affiliated reptile keepers?

I ask in all honesty, as a relocater, I am more interested in "conservation of wild species" then the "hobby" and what the hobby does.

Can we put aside differences? Interesting question.... for me, where I stand on some certain matters, the answer is a definite NO. Credibility, as mentioned before, is an important concept... it involves the (sometimes difficult to pin point) area of morals.
Which is an area that can be elusive to find within this reptile arena, it's there to a degree....but...

 

[Ramsayi]

I ask in all honesty, as a relocater, I am more interested in "conservation of wild species" then the "hobby" and what the hobby does.

The way I see it is that we already have something to cover your concerns.That is what NPWS should be putting their effort into rather than regulating hobbyists.

 

[Bluetongue1]

Cement,
One of the areas Gavin did mention was conservation. That is a huge umbrella that cover a multitude of different activities that vary from setting aside substantial areas of land at a cost of many millions of dollars as conservation reserves to monitoring specific populations to stopping economic projects from happening in order to prevent loss of critical habitat to educating people as to why they should not kill reptiles and how to appropriately deal with unwanted animals... While he deliberately steered clear of specifics at this point, what was stated with emphasis is that this would be a group to work on behalf of its members, to represent and safeguard their needs and best interests and to act on their behalf, particular with respect to requests involving approaching departments and politicians. The bottom line is, if you as a member see a need that needs to be addressed, then you can approach the national body to address it on your behalf. Allow me to provide a fictional example that relates to what you do. The new national curriculum for schools haqs an emphasis on conservation but does not specifically address the situation of snakes in or around domestic dwellings or work places. As member of a national association you could approach the national body about this. They may be able to put together a number of teachers who can produce appropriate teaching resources for varying year levels, which cover what you want and meet the stated objectives within the curriculum. The national body could then approach the federal education minister to have these materials made available and recommended for use, to all school teachers. Alternatively you may wish to tackle educating adults. So you put a request forward for the production of an educational information sheet which can be disseminated through shires to people living in snake prone areas.

Without a national representative body, whether you are a keeper, have commercial interests, are academically interested in herpetology or are conservation oriented with respect to these animals, anything you wish to see happen needs to be done entirely by you, with whatever resources you are personally able to muster. With a national body you have the opportunity to tap into a wealth of resources, experience and capabilities and the potential to be represented in approaching government departments or politicians by a group of individuals that command attention and respect and have the backing of many thousands of members.


"Setting aside our differences" worried me a lot when I first read it. I have come to understand that what it is saying is that we have a diverse collection of individuals with an affiliation to herpetology and that a national body would serve no single interest group within that amalgam. It is about the valuing all its constituents, irrespective of differences in interest, opinions, values or anything else. It is about uniting for a common cause to further the interests of herpetologists. I would add that this definitely includes the likes of doing whatever can be done to assist conservation, as the loss of any species would be a huge loss to Australian herpetology for all that have an interest in it.

Blue

 

[ronhalling]

WTG Blue, even if i had of tried i would not have been able to put it as succinctly or as respectfully as you have just done, it was the perfect scenario to use, i did not go too much into specifics in my blurb for fear of putting 1 side or the other in this equation off side, there is a multitude of people and groups who could and will benifit from a National group from the simplest 1 Rep hobbyist to the biggest breeders all with an equal voice on subjects such as COP's, Conservation, Importation of Reps between States, etc etc. If one was to sit down and work out how many different people and groups could share the umbrella of a National Body it would be staggering, in my humble opinion we would be looking at upwards of 1 mill people......now thats a big voice, ...........................Ron

 

[cement]

The way I see it is that we already have something to cover your concerns.That is what NPWS should be putting their effort into rather than regulating hobbyists.

yes i agree.

ok, great. Thank you for your efforts blue.